Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Millennials and "codes of conduct". (Score 4, Interesting) 247

Can anyone explain to me why Millennials are so gung-ho about "codes of conduct", and why they're so hypocritical about them?

Well, I could be wrong but I suspect every generation has had problems with snobbish moralism and hypocrisy. I've heard that August Caesar claimed himself to be a first amongst equals. But I would have hated to be anyone who in his presence dared treat him as an equal. About 2000 years ago, the Jews had a group known as the Pharisees, whom Jesus is said to have excoriated for excelling at making sure everyone around them saw how well they followed Jewish ceremonial law, but ignoring God's moral laws. I.e., they were sanctimonious jerks. Etc.

But I think the bigger issue is that many of these organizations espouse code of ethics which are internally inconsistent, and yet they won't admit that. They won't admit that people might hold different moral viewpoints for reasons which are just as defensible as theirs.

For example, Google says (said) "don't be evil". But there are different groups which have very incompatible views on what's evil: Pro-lifers vs. Planned Parenthood; conservatives vs. liberals vs. libertarians vs. anarchists; Christians vs. Muslims vs. atheists; Taliban vs. the Boston Symphony, etc. It's pretty clear that Google doesn't limit its actions to only those which all of those groups consider to be not evil.

So which of those groups' definitions of "evil" does Google willingly transgress? That's how you know which religions they consider false, which ethnic groups' beliefs they consider outmoded, etc. But they will not admit this fundamental truth of moral logic. Making them, in addition to everything else, disingenuous hypocrites.

Another problem is that organizations try to side-step the issue of whose ethics are correct, but saying that the real problem is causing offense. But this means that the most-offended person in the room gets the power to suppress the speech or actions of anyone with whom he disagrees. Some of whom find that, well, offensive. It stinks of sophism inspired by the fear of lawsuits.

Comment Selection bias (Score 4, Insightful) 244

Their tool only works (if at all) on certain categories of crime. It misses huge ones, particularly those in which the people in power engage:

* CIA torture.
* CIA, NSA, FBI, and police violations of the Constitution.
* CIA perjury to Congress.
* Bank executives' racketeering in regards to mortgage origination.

I'd pay good money for a tool to detect those kinds of crimes, and to see them properly prosecuted.

Comment Re:It's a distraction. (Score 1) 35

Do you even realize what the Nuremberg trials were about? You should be modded troll just for downplaying the Nuremberg trials by several orders of magnitude by implying it's comparable to a couple dozen guys in jail at gitmo.

Yes, I do. Maybe I'm just a bleeding-heart conservative, and have a soft spot for even a small number of tortured detainees.

Comment Just such a stupid, stupid article (Score 3, Insightful) 241

Why, when we are trying to encourage children to take up all things computing, is Programmers Day such a big flop?

Um, because the set of "${X} days/months" is a meaningless, stupid concept, curated by people without any meaningful claim to authority or unusual credibility?

This article's premise is about as sensical as asking why everyone named "Frank" isn't celebrating the fact that I live in North America.

"One Architecture, One OS" also translates as "One Egg, One Basket".